Anthurium: A Caribbean Studies Journal Volume 12 Issue 1 An Other Moment: Un-Collapsing the Chinese Article 7 Presence in the Caribbean May 2015 “And that is not how Jamaica is”: Cultural Creolization, Optimism, and National Identity in Kerry Young's Pao Dennis M. Hogan Brown University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlyrepository.miami.edu/anthurium Recommended Citation Hogan, Dennis M. (2015) "“And that is not how Jamaica is”: Cultural Creolization, Optimism, and National Identity in Kerry Young's Pao," Anthurium: A Caribbean Studies Journal: Vol. 12 : Iss. 1 , Article 7. Available at: http://scholarlyrepository.miami.edu/anthurium/vol12/iss1/7 This Essay is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthurium: A Caribbean Studies Journal by an authorized editor of Scholarly Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Hogan: Cultural Creolization, Optimism, and National Identity in <em>Pao</em> While scholars have long considered Caribbean nations as mixed, blended, and multicultural societies, acknowledging the role of many different ethnic, national, and racial groups in the formation and ongoing lives of these societies, the Chinese Caribbean community has received comparatively less attention than the Afro- or Indo-Caribbean ones. Yet many Caribbean countries experienced significant Chinese migration. Beginning in the nineteenth century and through the twentieth century, thriving Chinese communities could be found in Guyana, Jamaica, Trinidad, and other islands. The Chinese Jamaican community was both representative and unique: arriving in Jamaica at the end of the 1800s, Chinese immigrants established prosperous shops and other businesses throughout the island. Later in the twentieth century, as Jamaica became more tumultuous, many Chinese Jamaicans fled the country. Though a Chinese community persists in Jamaica, it is now much smaller and much less prominent than it was at its height from the 1930s through the 1960s. While some novels, like Patricia Powell’s The Pagoda, feature prominent Chinese Jamaican characters, Kerry Young’s recent novel Pao, published in 2011, represents the first novel about the Chinese Jamaican community written by a Chinese Jamaican. Pao tells the story of Yang Pao, a Chinese immigrant who arrives in Jamaica as a child and rises to become the crime boss of an underworld empire. To the extent that it is a crime novel, a novel of personal relationships, and a history novel, Pao is also a novel of ideas, and Young grapples prominently with concerns about Jamaican national identity. Pao tracks Jamaican political evolution from the turbulent 1930s to independence and the country’s postcolonial nation-building phase, and, as the novel’s plot progresses, the demographics of the Jamaican polity change, as do ideals of Jamaican citizenship. On her own terms, Young makes an important contribution to Jamaican literary production. At the same time, literature in Jamaica, as in other postcolonial Caribbean societies, is always engaged with the writing and reading of national and nationalist discourses: literature both reflects and contributes to changing understandings of national identity (Harney). Pao, told from the point of view of a Chinese immigrant to Jamaica, expresses the titular protagonist’s optimism about the future of the Jamaican nation combined with his anxiety about the extent to which the Chinese will become fully integrated members of a new Jamaican society. Yang Pao frequently makes reference to an official Jamaican national ideology of creolization and strength through diversity as an appeal to the fundamentally inclusive and tolerant nature of plural Jamaican identity. To this extent, the book seems, at first glance, to align itself with a Jamaican nation- building project rooted in such an ameliorative view of creolization, one in which the idealized Jamaican state is a blended one, and the ideal Jamaican citizen is herself racially and culturally creole. Published by Scholarly Repository, 2015 1 Anthurium: A Caribbean Studies Journal, Vol. 12, Iss. 1 [2015], Art. 7 To stop there, however, would be to miss essential aspects of the novel. As a character, Yang Pao is himself caught between different nationalisms: though, as a Chinese Jamaican, he expresses support for creolization and multiculturalism, and hopes to see greater inclusion for racial minorities, his stated anti-white and anti-imperialist politics have strong Black Nationalist resonances. Furthermore, Pao’s own actions, his line of work, and his eventual transition from a crime lord to a legitimate capitalist complicate his politics even further. Though Yang Pao represents and integrates many strains of Jamaican political thought, he never comes to fully embody any one. Thus, we cannot read Pao’s personal political development or political positions as coterminal with the novel’s own. Seemingly in response to Pao’s limiting point of view, Young expands the vision of Jamaica and Jamaican society that the novel presents primarily through the experiences and the voices of black female characters. Through these characters, Pao acknowledges the difficulties of life in Jamaica for the black majority and problematizes Pao’s multiculturalist optimism. In this novel, violence disproportionately affects blacks generally and black women in particular. Characters like Faye Wong and Marcia Campbell directly suffer the consequences of racialized violence, while both Cecily Wong and Gloria Campbell, Pao’s girlfriend, critique the inadequacies of Yang Pao’s leftist and multiculturalist rhetoric. I argue that, while Pao responds to a normative middle-class ideal of a creole Jamaica in which different cultural groups can coexist, the novel relies on its women characters to represent a darker side of the postcolonial experience, one that specifically touches the black Jamaican majority. In so doing, Pao, pushes back against Yang Pao’s naively utopian understanding of creolization in Jamaican society, and demonstrates, finally, that any multiculturalist Jamaican national ideology must also address racialized social and economic inequality if it is to succeed. Kamau Brathwaite, writing on creolization in Jamaican culture in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, defines creolization as “a cultural action […] based upon the stimulus/response of individuals within the society to their environment as—as white/black, culturally discrete groups—to each other” (Brathwaite 297). The process of creolization begins with the encounter of two or more culturally differentiated groups, and takes place as these groups adopt elements of culture belonging to one another, radically altering the original cultural practices from which they came. Creolization gives rise to new cultural formations born out of this encounter, and in Jamaica, as Brathwaite illustrates in his study, creolization took the form of Europeans adopting African social or dietary habits and Africans adopting European political and educational structures as well as European ways of talking, working, and understanding themselves as subjects. Theories of creolization represent an important way of interpreting the culture of the Caribbean, and anthropologists, historians, literary scholars, and http://scholarlyrepository.miami.edu/anthurium/vol12/iss1/7 2 Hogan: Cultural Creolization, Optimism, and National Identity in <em>Pao</em> sociologists have employed these theories in order to explain and discuss the results of the unique cultural encounters that have taken place and continue to take place in Caribbean societies (Tanikella 156). While creolization remains a foundational model for understanding Caribbean societies, it has not escaped vigorous argument and serious critique. More specifically, scholars studying the Caribbean have pointed out that celebrating this vision of a mixed, creole society plays into the hands of various nationalist ideologies of the postcolonial period. While we may broadly support the project of forging national identity and encouraging positive national identification among citizens of Caribbean societies, we must also take care to distinguish between genuinely justice-oriented nationalisms and those that merely justify or paper over inequality and group-based oppression. Along these lines, scholars working across the Caribbean have cautioned that, to use Leela Tanikella’s words, “[h]ybridity celebrated as a trope of nationality in Caribbean nation states produces the nation as homogenous and diverse, which begs the question whether discourses of hybridity have become master narratives of containment” (156). For Tanikella, then, hybridity discourse, in the context of official national ideologies, may actually foreclose on other, more productive ways of envisioning the nation. Similarly, Aisha Khan’s article “Good to Think: Creolization, Optimism, and Agency” reconsiders theories of creolization as employed in the discipline of anthropology and includes a case study of national ideology in Trinidad and Tobago, in which she asserts that the official Trinidadian vision of Trinidad and Tobago as a “callaloo nation” (656) has served to recognize the cultural contributions of Afro-Trinidadians at the same time as it has discouraged identification with racial groups as a fundamentally political concern (657). Ultimately, Khan writes: “the cultural schema of the state purports to protect the cultural heritages of